Neville
received incorrect legal advice from Kingfields
We received incorrect legal advice from Kingfields Solicitors regarding HMO licensing requirements for a property in Portsmouth, which has resulted in direct financial loss and unnecessary compliance costs. In June 2024, we specifically asked whether an HMO licence was required. We were advised in writing by a Kingfields solicitor that the property was exempt on the basis it was Class C1 student halls of residence. This advice was reconfirmed again in October 2024, despite further checks and direct questioning. Following a Portsmouth City Council inspection, it was later confirmed that the exemption does not apply to privately managed accommodation, and that an HMO licence is required. This rendered the earlier advice factually incorrect. As a result of relying on Kingfields’ advice, we have incurred: • An unexpected HMO licence application fee • Ongoing annual renewal costs • Significant time, stress, and disruption • Compliance action that could have been avoided with correct advice Had accurate guidance been provided at the outset, this issue would have been identified and addressed during acquisition, avoiding penalties and urgent remedial action. Based on our experience, we found the advice incorrect and unreliable, and we would strongly encourage others to seek independent confirmation before relying on Kingfields for regulatory or property compliance matters.
